current subscriber of swtor / the number of people who have played swtor
current players of wow / the number of people who have played wow

Nope, peak of SWTOR players. You're apparently either unwilling or unable through ignorance to be objective and realise that the methodology is different and the comparison as such can't be considered an honest comparison by anyone with a sound mind. So which one is it?

Nope, peak of SWTOR players. You're apparently either unwilling or unable through ignorance to be objective and realise that the methodology is different and the comparison as such can't be considered an honest comparison by anyone with a sound mind. So which one is it?

500k isn't the peak. 1.7 million is the peak for swtor. 12 million is the peak for wow. You don't know what retention rates are.
Peak players have nothing to do with them.

So it has come to a point where I would kindly ask a moderator to lock this thread as it only serves as a vehicle to bash SWTOR and World of Warcraft. I like both games, so this thread has really turned to utter shit and there's no point in keeping it running.

We have numerous threads detailing the state of the game, we don't really need a soapbox for the peanut gallery to hurl rotten fruit with their words.

What this guy said. Stop raging at each other and either answer the OP's question or post nothing. I'm reading to get more info on how swtor is doing and whether or not I should try it, I've seen nothing but a ragefest and I think there's already been a moderator who's posted here.

Naftc, "Hunters are the cheapest class in game and when played right are more deadly than a train plowing through a field of bunnies covered in napalm"

If I were comparing peak to total sales the retention rate of swtor would 70%. That is clearly not what I am saying.

Since the idea that this is related to WoW has blinded you to basic math. Let me explain using an example.

A small restaurant opens up off the main strip and in the past year it has had a total of 400 unique customers. 100 have become repeat customers.
A large restaurant opens up on the main strip and in the past year it has had a total of 4000 unique customers. 1000 have become repeat customers.

The retention rate is the number of people who have tried the restaurant and have come back. Both restaurants have the same retention rate but the large restaurant has ten times the number of repeat customers.

If I were comparing peak to total sales the retention rate of swtor would 70%. That is clearly not what I am saying.

Since the idea that this is related to WoW has blinded you to basic math. Let me explain using an example.

A small restaurant opens up off the main strip and in the past year it has had a total of 400 unique customers. 100 have become repeat customers.
A large restaurant opens up on the main strip and in the past year it has had a total of 4000 unique customers. 1000 have become repeat customers.

The retention rate is the number of people who have tried the restaurant and have come back. Both restaurants have the same retention rate but the large restaurant has ten times the number of repeat customers.

That example isn't even remotely relevant to the point at hand. And SWTORs known peak is 2.4 million players which was the sales during launch period. And if peak players don't have anything to do with retention rates why do you use that number for SWTOR?

That example isn't even remotely relevant to the point at hand, so again, are you just ignorant or unwilling?

No, it what you are contesting.

Originally Posted by anyaka21

the numbers are fairly synonymous across the board. There is, overall, about a 75-80% retention loss regardless of game.

^ this is what you have disagreed with.
And you have written:

Originally Posted by Zokonorb

You can think the numbers are synonymous across the board all you want, you'd be horribly wrong however.
*snip*
WoW did nothing but grow for years, SWTOR did nothing but shrink drastically to a fraction of the initial playerbase within half a year, hate to break it to you but there's NOTHING synonymous in those situations.

From the start you have been confused about what retention rate, what the OP is talking about, and talking about growth.

2.4 million is not the total historical number of subscribers for TOR. It is the number of box sales at launch.

The total number of historical subscribers for TOR is, so far as I know, a number that is not publicly available. Therefore it is impossible for the public to compare The Old Republic's numbers with World of Warcraft based on that metric.

2.4 million is not the total historical number of subscribers for TOR. It is the number of box sales at launch.

The total number of historical subscribers for TOR is, so far as I know, a number that is not publicly available. Therefore it is impossible for the public to compare The Old Republic's numbers with World of Warcraft based on that metric.

2.2 million initial box sales (if I remember correctly, with 1.7 million playing 3 months after launch. That would be your metric if you were looking for one.

What on earth are you talking about? That has nothing to do with anything.

The point is that people are trying to argue that TOR current subscribers/TOR box sales at launch

is comparable to

WoW current subscribers/WoW total historical number of subscribers.

They are not. That's like trying to say something with a weight of 25 grams and something with a weight of 25 pounds have the same weight.

You could argue peak vs. peak if you wanted to. Although the peaks for each game were hit at different points (SWTOR at launch, WoW during the tail end of LK), so it wouldn't be a strong argument. That and the growth curves for both games are vastly different (to be fair though, the growth curve for more non-WoW MMO's has been very similar over the years).

They are not. That's like trying to say something with a weight of 25 grams and something with a weight of 25 pounds have the same weight.

Not really why it's inapropriate. It's inapropriate because of when the games were launched. If you wanted to compare something more suiting it could be for example retention rate of subscribers 5 months after MOP launch compared to 5 months after TOR launch. The volume of subscribers itself does not really matter.

How are chinese players inaccessible to other MMO's? That's a rethorical question by the way, because they obviously aren't. They are only inaccessible by choice of the people behind the game. And even if it was available in chine its problems would still linger.

first, apologies, I did not realize that the massive number of 2 more mmo's vs how many are out are accessible in China...so I should restate....

WoW just has a higher number of players, and over half of which are inaccessible to almost every other mmo.

Actually, it's not necessarily the choice of the people behind the game. It could just as easily be choice by the chinese government since they have the ultimate say in whether or not a game is available to their country. Saying that shows ZERO factual basis. Show pure speculation and assumption on your part. I would also suggest a speculation that China may not want SWTOR in their country because it is a huge part of the American culture, and allowing it would be allowing something their government does not way.

See what I did there. You have your speculation, I have mine. Which is right? Probably neither.

Yeah, McDonald's, KFC and Hooters are all okay with the Chinese government, but Star Wars? That's allowing the Western imperialists to win.

Even if it is speculation that BioWare and EA simply don't care about the Chinese market because Star Wars isn't a big enough thing there to make it worth their while, speculation based on facts is not the same as making shit up because that's what you want to believe.

Yeah, McDonald's, KFC and Hooters are all okay with the Chinese government, but Star Wars? That's allowing the Western imperialists to win.

Even if it is speculation that BioWare and EA simply don't care about the Chinese market because Star Wars isn't a big enough thing there to make it worth their while, speculation based on facts is not the same as making shit up because that's what you want to believe.

so you're making stuff, and I'm making stuff up, but somehow you're is more credible than mine...

I don't understand the MMO player mentality nowadays with this whole my game needs X million amount of people for it too be good? This is not the case. Sure, World of Warcraft has 12 million players, you know what that gets you? Good Customer Support. The "12 million" is spread out over 50 realms, 4 continents and all of the time zones. Get the hell over it. The number is in no way affecting your playing experience.

This game is getting better, A LOT better. The candle has been re lit and you can tell. Bioware cares regardless of how many posts you have read from pissed off hormonal teenagers saying otherwise. This F2P model is a good idea and they're already lifting restrictions. I may even resubscribe. Its a new MMO and on a semi new engine, and its not even a year old yet. Give it a chance and if you don't like it move on.

so you're making stuff, and I'm making stuff up, but somehow you're is more credible than mine...

It is a fact that World of Warcraft does not have a monopoly on the Chinese market. It is a fact that there are other Western MMOs operating in that market.

It is a fact that there is no evidence that there are any special barriers preventing EA from marketing TOR in China.

Those are facts. Facts are not the same as making stuff up.

Originally Posted by Carl Sagan

"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage" Suppose (I'm following a group therapy approach by the psychologist Richard Franklin[3]) I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle--but no dragon.

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.